From: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
To: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, sds@tycho.nsa.gov,
jengelh@medozas.de, paul.moore@hp.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, netfilter@vger.kernel.org,
mr.dash.four@googlemail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] secmark: export binary yes/no rather than kernel internal secid
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 13:01:36 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1285606896.2815.36.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1009271038280.25748@tundra.namei.org>
On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 10:50 +1000, James Morris wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, Eric Paris wrote:
> For the reasons above, I think the secctx string needs to be exported in
> addition to this rather than instead of.
I won't argue, I don't agree with your reasoning, but I'm not opposed to
this result. We have 3 competing suggestions:
Jan suggested we:
completely eliminate secmark from procfs+netlink and only export secctx
in netlink.
Eric suggested we:
completely eliminate secmark from procfs+netlink and then export secctx
in procfs+netlink
sounds like James suggested we:
continue to export meaningless and confusing secmark from procfs+netlink
and then export secctx in procfs+netlink as well.
I'm going to implement James' idea and resend the patch series. Any
strong objections?
-Eric
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
To: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, sds@tycho.nsa.gov,
jengelh@medozas.de, paul.moore@hp.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, netfilter@vger.kernel.org,
mr.dash.four@googlemail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] secmark: export binary yes/no rather than kernel internal secid
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 13:01:36 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1285606896.2815.36.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1009271038280.25748@tundra.namei.org>
On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 10:50 +1000, James Morris wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, Eric Paris wrote:
> For the reasons above, I think the secctx string needs to be exported in
> addition to this rather than instead of.
I won't argue, I don't agree with your reasoning, but I'm not opposed to
this result. We have 3 competing suggestions:
Jan suggested we:
completely eliminate secmark from procfs+netlink and only export secctx
in netlink.
Eric suggested we:
completely eliminate secmark from procfs+netlink and then export secctx
in procfs+netlink
sounds like James suggested we:
continue to export meaningless and confusing secmark from procfs+netlink
and then export secctx in procfs+netlink as well.
I'm going to implement James' idea and resend the patch series. Any
strong objections?
-Eric
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-27 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-24 20:45 [PATCH 1/6] secmark: do not return early if there was no error Eric Paris
2010-09-24 20:45 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-24 20:45 ` [PATCH 2/6] secmark: make secmark object handling generic Eric Paris
2010-09-24 20:45 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-25 8:39 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2010-09-27 16:47 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-27 16:47 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-24 20:45 ` [PATCH 3/6] secmark: export binary yes/no rather than kernel internal secid Eric Paris
2010-09-24 20:45 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-25 8:41 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2010-09-27 16:44 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-27 16:44 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-27 0:50 ` James Morris
2010-09-27 0:50 ` James Morris
2010-09-27 17:01 ` Eric Paris [this message]
2010-09-27 17:01 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-27 18:29 ` Paul Moore
2010-09-27 18:29 ` Paul Moore
2010-09-27 19:25 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-27 19:25 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-27 19:45 ` Paul Moore
2010-09-27 19:45 ` Paul Moore
2010-09-27 22:48 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2010-09-28 0:00 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-09-28 8:45 ` Mr Dash Four
2010-09-27 23:45 ` James Morris
2010-09-27 23:45 ` James Morris
2010-09-28 12:32 ` Casey Schaufler
2010-09-28 12:32 ` Casey Schaufler
2010-09-24 20:45 ` [PATCH 4/6] security: secid_to_secctx returns len when data is NULL Eric Paris
2010-09-24 20:45 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-27 13:49 ` Casey Schaufler
2010-09-27 13:49 ` Casey Schaufler
2010-09-24 20:45 ` [PATCH 5/6] conntrack: export lsm context rather than internal secid via netlink Eric Paris
2010-09-24 20:45 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-24 21:08 ` Jan Engelhardt
2010-09-27 11:01 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2010-09-27 16:51 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-27 16:51 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-24 20:45 ` [PATCH 6/6] secmark: export secctx, drop secmark in procfs Eric Paris
2010-09-24 20:45 ` Eric Paris
2010-09-24 21:01 ` [PATCH 1/6] secmark: do not return early if there was no error Jan Engelhardt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1285606896.2815.36.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mr.dash.four@googlemail.com \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul.moore@hp.com \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=selinux@tycho.nsa.gov \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.